Rice Admits To U.S. Troops: ‘Your Honor and Your Sacrifice’ Is ‘Appreciated’ By Iraq War Critics
Rice Admits To U.S. Troops: ‘Your Honor and Your Sacrifice’ Is ‘Appreciated’ By Iraq War Critics
Over the weekend, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice addressed military personnel stationed in Baghdad. She told the troops that everyone — including critics of the administration’s Iraq policy — believes that “the sacrifice and the labor of our men and women here has been honorable.” She called the debate over escalation a sign of a “great democracy.” An excerpt from her speech:
And the final thing I want to say is I know that a lot’s going on in Washington and that you’re hearing it. A lot’s going on because we are a great democracy. And people have their views and they’re going to express them. And some do not think that this was the right war to fight, and others think that we in the Administration haven’t fought this war quite right. By the way, all of them know that the sacrifice and the labor of our men and women here has been honorable.
And so when you hear the criticism of the war or the criticism of the President or of me or of anybody else, I do want you to know that to a person at home, your honor and your sacrifice and your labor is appreciated. People know what you’re doing and it’s appreciated across the board. I don’t care what people think of the policies; it’s appreciated across the board.
Rice’s comments contradict earlier claims from the administration that a debate on Iraq policy would be “detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.” Her words echoed those of Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace, who said the troops understand the “debate’s being carried on by patriotic people who care about them and who care about their mission.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Good for Condi. I wonder if she really believes it?
February 19th, 2007 at 1:05 pmWhat was the name of the August 6th PDB?
Yeah we thought so. You can put Gucci on a war criminal but they remain a war criminal.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:06 pmLipstick on a pig, Condi.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:10 pmI am sick fed up of america starting wars and ruining our summer holidays
We should start a war between Canada and Mexico and see if you like living near a F()cking battle ground or threaten to Nuclear Bomb Mexico and let the radioactive dust fly over america …….. get the F()ck out of our neighbours country and let them have a normal life ……… F()ck of America
February 19th, 2007 at 1:13 pmand i must say, i agree with that posted statement of condi’s, and have said the same to any military person i’ve talked to…
but what’s the rest of her story? …what else did she have to say?
February 19th, 2007 at 1:13 pm“… but even so, you’re stuck here until we get the oil deals fixed…”
something like that?
riiiiiiight…
Rice obviously missed Republican talking point #1:
War critics “embolden the enemy.”
February 19th, 2007 at 1:14 pmCondi Rice must be forced to resign as Secretary of State in disgrace!
February 19th, 2007 at 1:16 pmWhile I’m happy that she was willing to make such statements, I’m still skeptical of her intentions. If she really felt that way she wouldn’t be repeating administration talking points at all. Just because she seems to be the most sane member of the administration does not make her a respectably sane member of the population, just a step or two better than her comrades.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:18 pmIf a war was started between Canada and Alaska and America feared nuclear fallout ,,,, Diplomacy would work then ………Dont disrespect us over hear so much then and Talk to Iran …………. SICK TO DEATH OF AMERICAN VIOLENCE
February 19th, 2007 at 1:19 pmThis is a George W. Bush device: use condescending language to stipulate a point to your opposition. Pretend you’re pleading with your followers to try to understand the point of view of the dissenters, even though it looks like they’re just a bunch of terrorist-sympathizing Bin Laden lovers. I’m sure it works well on the rubes.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:20 pmdon’t speak for me bitch. you are a murderer, not me.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:20 pmthis shouldn’t even need pointing out but at least she did it, you know, years after she should have, and while allies in her party continue to imply the opposite. why the hell do people think we opposed the war in the first place? i cant speak for everyone, but the desire to not waste our soldiers lives in some pointless gamble was way up on my list, and i would imagine most war critics.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:20 pmCondi Rice is in Iraq to force the Iraqi government to sign over its oil production to BIG OIL companies. Iraq invasion was for the OIL only.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:28 pmthat darn pesky truth just slips out some times! she better watch that in the future
February 19th, 2007 at 1:31 pmthats right Jay – you can keep upto date here
http://www.basraoilunion.org
February 19th, 2007 at 1:32 pm#9 after reading your “just a step or two ahead of her comrad’s” I was thinking of the expensive shoes miss sleeze buy’s and then the thought came to mind of Marcos (wife ) and her 300 pair’s…My thinking is rice is bush’s mistress of shoes and in way over her head..She like the rest of this administration should be Impeaced, charged with war crimes and sent to prison…..Blessings all….Do something today to end the war’s and bring all our troop’s home…..Peace
February 19th, 2007 at 1:32 pm#14 Jay Randal
I don’t get why our companies have to be so greedy. Our government claims its all to get the work done fast and jump start the economy, but in the long run it will only leave the country impoverished while our oil conglomerates reap the profits.
If they really wanted to strengthen the Iraqi economy, they would help start Iraqi companies and train Iraqi’s to do the work. Would be more effective creating jobs for Iraqi’s and lowering unemployment rather than bringing in experienced foreigners to do all the work. Let the Iraqi’s build the infrastructure. It would take longer, but in the long run would improve their economy and standard of living.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:33 pmI don’t get why our companies have to be so greedy. Our government claims its all to get the work done fast and jump start the economy, but in the long run it will only leave the country impoverished while our oil conglomerates reap the profits.
Comment by AshenShard
You answered your own question, AshenShard. The oil companies are there to loot Iraq’s oil resources, they don’t care about what condition they leave the country. Don’t pay attention ti what they say, pay attention to WHAT THEY DO.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:41 pmThanks Condi, we appreciate the honesty.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:46 pmIt looks like the Bushies are really falling to pieces.
Et Tu Condi?
One of Shrubs most favored wives is off the reservation?
I doubt it. Maybe one of her aids accidentally packed her concience for the trip and it somehow got out.
Maybe they’re beginning to realize what a mistake it was to push their propaganda talking point which states, “if you criticize the president for his failures your hurting the troops”.
I don’t think the majority of Americans appreciate being called traitors for pointing out that George Bush has made a mess our our Country and its reputation and at least two others Countries as well.
There is also the problem of the entire Republican party going down toilet forever. How is a republican to get elected? Hmmmmmmm. Continue to blindly support Bush and it’s off to oblivion or criticize Bush and face the same bullshit attacks from his lackeys.
2008 is going to be a great year for Democrats.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:47 pmAshenShard > Bush Regime is NOT in Iraq to help the Iraqi population. They are there to steal the OIL for the Petrol Cartel and to make money for Military Industrial Complex CEOs and for other war profiteers like Halliburton. Iraq oil industry was nationalized for the revenues to benefit Iraqis, but now it’s being privitized for BIG OIL companies. The whole thing is about greed and corruption. Iraq occupation is the worst scandal in United States history. It is shamefull.
Post 16 > thankyou for that link to Oil Union in Basra, Iraq.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:50 pmLet the Iraqi’s build the infrastructure. It would take longer, but in the long run would improve their economy and standard of living.
Comment by AshenShard
The biggest problem facing those rebuilding of Iraq’s economy? The fact that over 40% of the middle class have already fled Iraq and are no longer there.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:59 pmhas she ever told the truth in her life?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:05 pmWhat an insult to the troops to have this shallow individual address them with such innane remarks. Like her boss, she is way in over her head and completely ineffective in her role.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:08 pmThe administration and the republican party have got to stop playing PR games if they ever expect to get any support for their failed war policy.
Comment by Spudge_Boy #4
Spudge,
I’m afraid we’re waay past being able to get behind this “failed war policy”…
…no matter WHAT Condi or anybody else says…
…stick a fork in IT, and them…
NOTE:
hopefully this is the REAL Spudge…
…but if not…O’h well...
February 19th, 2007 at 2:09 pmTo risk a dissenting view, has everyone actually analyzed what Ms. Rice said: “…the sacrifice and labor of our men and women here has been honorable”? Where is the honor in having the American military illegally occupying another country? The vocabulary of so many Americans seems to be devoid on one particular word: empathy. If Americans were to actually imagine soldiers in another country occupying their cities with guns openly drawn and firing upon civilians, would Americans then believe that those occupying soldiers were acting honorably? I suggest that Ms. Rice ask the Iraqi people if the American soldier has acted honorably. But that would mean being interested in what the inhabitants of the occupied country actually think of their suppressors and to pose that question would certainly not be good for public relations.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:23 pmsounds like she wants to apologize lol
poor condiluted rice :grin:
http://www.micropoll.com/akira/MicroPoll?mode=html&id=23186
February 19th, 2007 at 2:31 pmIt IS all about the OIL. It always has and always will.
Comment by Spudge_Boy #27
Y’know Spudge,
The MSM allowed Bushiva to get away with almost saying that exact same thing (in your post)…
…about three maybe four months ago Bushiva was giving a speech in front of some group like the Chamber of Commerce or something…
…and he said point blank:
“Imagine control of the oil fields in the hands of terrists (sic)”…
…Wolf (et al) all seemed oblivious to that specific quote, and when I emailed them (CNN, MSNBC,ABC etc…)…
…got nothing more than an automatic response…
What a racket (this occupation is)…huh?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:33 pmYou think the various hearings coming in the next few weeks and months have caused her to move to a softer stance ?You bet your bibby!She’s seen the writing on the wall folks.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:36 pmThe administration has always felt it was in their own best political interests (their prime motivation for everything) to smear and lie about the opposition. What changed? Why are they suddenly trying to come across as decent? Are the investigations starting to get a little too close for comfort?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:36 pmCondi that brought us the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud is on a PR junket for President’s Day. And she wants that oil contract signed, sealed and delivered!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm#17 Sharon: Did you see the photos of Condi out shopping for shoes while New Orleans flooded? Outrageously appalling! I think she’s in it knee deep and should be out looking for boots now that he’s a lameduck and she’s become “duckella marcos”.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:39 pmI hope this doesn’t mean she’s thinking of running for President!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:41 pmCondi’s a slimey snake of the first magnitude – don’t ever trust her methods, antics, or her jargon. The ONLY reason she’s out there going against the #1 Rethug talking point is to attempt to reverse the public sentiment against this administration of corruption. It’s over for Condi politically and she now knows it. I wonder when Condi will sing?? Wonder when Powell will sing? I guess there are enough “songbirds” to go ’round and it seems like one is spewing his guts each day. This GOP is so dug into the muck of this administration that it doesn’t even know how deep. If I had any affiliation with the Rethug Party, I’d be out there at my SOS office and changing my party affiliation….due to sheer disgust! They’ve pimped their own constituency…hahhahahah!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:42 pm#35 Oh, Condi’s “running” okay….she’s running from the truth of her complicity with the Shrub! Tabloids say that she’s Georgie’s little “candy” and that Mrs. Georgie is lawyering up these days….I wouldn’t doubt it a bit. Hmmm….I wonder what size show ole’ georgie wears. No doubt he’ll need a good disguise when he’s out of office and back on the street.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:44 pmChimpeach: Come across as legitimate? Now that’s a reeeeeeeal stretch! No doubt they have ulterior motives if only to muddy the waters and through their double speak, they’ll have people’s heads spinning – again. It’s all part of the diabolical GOP agenda! It’s the “Abbott/Costello redux of “who’s on first”.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pmIt almost seems like this soulless, Chickenhawk Neo-Conservative actually has some emotions
You know… outside of extravagance/lust, gluttony, avarice/greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride/hubris
February 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pmSaying it and believing it are two different things, Ms. Rice.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:51 pmSpudge – I know….I saw that clip. She’s an amoral, repugnant liar & hypocrite. Just like GWB who was “on vacation” fiddling while New Orleans was destroyed. What’s worse and illustrative of the level of personal and national impotency under the Shrub’s rule is that they couldn’t manage to get water to the people in the Dome for 5 days! 5 Days! Imagine how “secure” and “well protected” that makes citizens feel? About the same degree of “security and protection” we feel with our borders gaping open…..which is zilch! This administration has reached such depths of corruption that it’s stench is being smelled all over the world…..so low that they are now walking under ants with top hats on!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:52 pm#39 – Don’t allow your altruistic sense of morality cloud the truth – Condi Rice MUST BE calibrating spiritually at the same level as her contemporaries all around her….which is in the negative calibration – which means barely alive. Always maintain a healthy sense of skepticism with this administration and be not deceived by anything that sounds reasonable, trustworthy, or honest – because if you do, then you will be one maligned, hurt, and disillusioned. As the adage goes and so aptly is applied to this administration of smoke & mirrors:
FIRST TIME – SHAME ON YOU! SECOND TIME – SHAME ON ME! FOREWARNED IS ALWAYS FOREARMED.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:54 pmThis will be spun as Condi trying to boost the morale of the troops that the anti-American, terrorist-loving pinko progressive elitists have harmed by their misguided, hateful lack of support for the troops through their failure to support the mission and victory. (Did I get all the buzz words in there?)
February 19th, 2007 at 3:04 pmThe troops don’t need her to “translate” for us. As if our stand against an illegal war is potentially an unpatriotic event that needs to be qualified by our leaders.
The troops know who the ones are that want to give them better armor and more pay. the troops know who the ones are that want to bring them home to their families. The troops know who the ones are that only want to call on them for true military emergencies, and not just on any political whim to be used as fodder to save face.
All that being said, it’s fun to see the administration realizing that the public is SO not with them.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:08 pmSec’y Rice was being polite. Darrell Worley just returned from enteratining the troops and said many expressed to him their discouragement. When asked why, Worley rtesponded troop frustration over one-sided (negative) coverage and Leftists who “don’t understand the mission”.
So just tell yourselves how much your “contribution” helps our war-effort. Isn’t your delusion delicious?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:45 pmI hear about these troops, but never hear FROM them. Whereas I seem to read more and more every day about troops on the “left” side… Funny that.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:48 pmVery diplomatic words from a classy lady. Probably as genuine as me telling the progressives here at TP that their support for a non-binding resolution that emboldens the enemy and demoralizes the troops (while accomplishing nothing else) is a perfectly coherent endeavor.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:48 pmPeople know what you’re doing and it’s appreciated across the board. I don’t care what people think of the policies; it’s appreciated across the board.
***********************************
Rice is only half right — so while what she said may not be a steaming pile of bovine excrement, it’s not something you want to take to the bank either. While it’s true that most people support the troops even if they don’t support the war and/or the Bush administration, today’s and yesterday’s articles from the Washington Post concerning the treatment of injured veterans at Walter Reed suggest that this is only true as long as the troops are still physically able to serve in combat. Once they’re incapacitated, the government seems almost determined to forget about them. One of the things which was appalling about the articles in the Post was about the veterans (plural, meaning more than one person) who found that they were not listed as having ever served in Iraq and were required to supply evidence that they had been there.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pmRice Admits To U.S. Troops: ‘Your Honor and Your Sacrifice’ Is ‘Appreciated’ By Iraq War Critics
Caption: “Salute my shoes please, that’s it”
February 19th, 2007 at 3:54 pmRice Admits To U.S. Troops: ‘Your Honor and Your Sacrifice’ Is ‘Appreciated’ By Iraq War Critics.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:54 pm‘Now get back in that Humvee again. Drive down that road again and find the last IED again so the emotion terror will sign a surrender agreement on the deck of the USS Mission Accomplished.’
Verites, Yep! I was one of the screamers during the Katrina mess…Everyone in politics that had an email address got scathing notes from me to do something from day one…All governors and polatician’s….For 4 day’s and night’s and then on through 24/7 for week’s my T.V and computer were on…All that work and who responded while dead eyed rice baught shoes and bull shit bush ate cake and boped all over the country except to N.O. (Canada) and several foreign countries….Thank You Canada and who ever helped while our diddlers diddled….BTW. We could use some one’s help in removing this diseased administration now…Any taker’s.?.Please…We are having a terrible time getting all the slime removed and put in jail where they belong…Great post’s all….Blessings….Peace
February 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pmMadrid, Brussels, London, Berlin, Paris, Rome, and Vienna may well be off-limits to U.S. members of Congress soon. Just as well: they will still be able to enjoy pleasant summer breaks in Crawford, Texas, or Jackson Hole, Wyo., in the best of companies [1], [2]. That’s certainly preferable to ending up in a European jail for a very long time.
Every one of the 535 members of the 110th Congress is liable to face criminal indictment from the International Criminal Court in de Hague if the U.S. uses nuclear weapons in the impending conflict with Iran.
Following an indictment, every country that is a State Party to the International Criminal Court (ICC) will be required to take into custody any members of Congress that are temporarily on their soil and surrender them to the Court. None of the Western European State Parties to the ICC have signed bilateral “Article 98 agreements” with the United States that would give immunity to U.S. citizens.
The reasons why members of Congress are liable to face criminal indictment by the ICC in the aftermath of a U.S. nuclear attack on Iran are:
The crimes will be in the category of “most serious crimes of international concern”;
February 19th, 2007 at 3:57 pmThe U.S. Congress funded the creation of the weapons to commit the crimes, and paid the salaries of the servicemembers that pushed the buttons;
The U.S. Congress was aware that conditions were such that the crimes could occur in the ordinary course of events;
The U.S. Congress had the authority and ability to prevent the crimes from occurring, and failed to take reasonable measures within its power to do so;
At least some members of Congress actively aided, abetted and assisted in the commission of the crimes.
Believe me jail is better than What I will do to you lot if ANY Radiational Fallout land anywhere nere my children
Worley rtesponded troop frustration over one-sided (negative) coverage and Leftists who “don’t understand the missionâ€.
So just tell yourselves how much your “contribution†helps our war-effort. Isn’t your delusion delicious?
Comment by valiant venus #47
Dear virulent venereal disease,
…the trouble IS, we Liberal/Progressives KNOW all too well what their mission is…
…and THEY don’t…
…and I’ll lay you odds (bad choice of words, I’ll rephrase that)…
…I’d be willing to BET that history is kinder to US, than it’s going to be to YOU…
February 19th, 2007 at 4:03 pmBelieve me jail is better than What I will do to you lot if ANY Radiational Fallout land anywhere nere my children
Comment by mental teuchter
Are you a home schooler?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:04 pmDefine emboldens. Seriously. Without using a dictionary.
That word is something NOBODY used until Bush’s speech-writer put it in a speech. Now we hear it every damn day. I guarantee that about 75% of the people who throw it around don’t even know what it means, they just think it sounds cool.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:07 pmExactly. You know it is complete crap, just like everything you say.
Comment by Spudge_Boy —
Great comeback Spudge_Boy. I was toying with what to say to that one. You are spot on as ususal. Keep up the great work you do.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:10 pm“Whereas I seem to read more and more every day about troops on the “left†side… Funny that.”
Those comments “appreciative” of Leftist anti-war stances generally fall into the category of soldier referred to by John Kerry. Those who joined to defend the country understand the score.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:11 pmOh, I see. So not all soldiers want to defend or sacrifice for our country? They just are in it for the scenic view of the bloodshed?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:16 pmParrot – Some soldiers Senator Kerry referred to use the service as a jobs program – but of course you knew that….
February 19th, 2007 at 4:20 pmAre you a home schooler?
took me a while But I finaly got it ??? mental teuchter
try again
February 19th, 2007 at 4:21 pmObviously that makes them less patriotic. It also must somehow protect them from getting their limbs and heads blown off. Silly me. Of course I should have known that. They have no right to complain.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:29 pmMT – Are you a Canuck? (Please take that as a compliment. You seem to have the over-the-top level of “I HATE the US” down pat.) A German hiding…I mean, living in Paraguay?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:32 pm“Obviously that makes them less patriotic. ”
Of course it does. Patriotism is defined as “love of country” – not love of what the country owes ME. Finally, a breakthrough…we agree on something.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:34 pm#62 valiant venus
Some soldiers Senator Kerry referred to use the service as a jobs program – but of course you knew that….
I missed that quote. Could you dig that one up for me?
But, the truth is that some people do join the service as a job, as a way to get on-the-job training, and as a way to get their college paid for. All three at the same time. I know, because I did.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:53 pmYou are assuming that they love their country less than those that do not sign up for education and training.
This logic is flawed.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:09 pmThis logic is flawed.
Comment by Parrotlover77 #68
Hey Parrot,
You DO realize that you’re attempting to hold a “rational” debate with a…
…venereal disease…
…is that wise (healthy even)?
…just curious…
February 19th, 2007 at 5:17 pmhahahhahahahaha!!!
I kid virulent vd (aka valiant)…
…it knows…
February 19th, 2007 at 5:19 pmDude, of course she doesn’t believe it. She’s just being polite.
She was provost at Stanford, remember? She cut her teeth on antiwar Democrats during her tenure there. Believe me, she understands the intent of John Murtha’s legislation: to make sure that the Surge fails while Bush is President so that Democrats don’t get the blame.
The worst thing that could happen to Congressional Democrats, who have bet on a loss overseas, is for David Petraus to succeed in Iraq. The entire antiwar movement, on which Democrats have placed their bets, would come a cropper.
Suppose that Democrats take power in 2009 (which is now receding in probability; Giuliani’s rise, coupled with the Democrats identitification as the “antiwar/peace” party in the middle of the War on Terror will mark your party for the next twenty years. Just ask George McGovern….). Do you honestly believe that Republicans will ever trust Democrats in foreign policy after what you people have done to us in Iraq?
You have, deliberately and for political benefit for your own party, undermined an expeditionary army overseas. Murtha is trying to make sure that Petraeus cannot be reinforced properly. Believe me, everyone in the Officer Corps knows what is going on. No one is fooled.
The time will come when, say, a President Hillary or a President Obama will desperately need Republican support for a military venture overseas and we will not be there. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me, as the saying goes. We won’t be there.
You Democrats have made your bed. You will now lie in it.
There was a time when Democrats produced men like Truman, Acheson, Marshall, and JFK. They understood the vital need for bipartisan cooperation in foreign policy. You Democrats of this time will have to learn the hard way that you cannot force your agenda on others.
The ironic thing is that you and the Neocons you criticize are more alike than you care to admit.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:34 pmsection9 >
I thought the saying was:
“Fool me once, shame on – shame on you, fool me – you can’t get fooled again…”
February 19th, 2007 at 6:58 pm“You are assuming that they love their country less than those that do not sign up for education and training. This logic is flawed.”
Actually, what is the motive for joining? The motive demonstrates the level of patriotism.
a.) “I think I’ll join and learn how to (fill in the blank) or (earn college money) and oh, yeah…I love my country.”
b.) “I love my country and wish to defend her. Oh…I can get a college degree during or after my service? Wow!”
Oh yeah, I see the “flaw”……
Chimpeach – look up Kerry’s “joke” about Bush/troops. (Were you in a coma a few months back?)
February 19th, 2007 at 7:03 pmFlip-Flop. And here I thought the bragging trait of the Bush administration was their stubbornly “staying the course” on their issues. What’s the sound I hear: Chink.
February 19th, 2007 at 8:36 pmafter what you people have done to us in Iraq
i kinda choked on that one…
amazing… there really are people who think this? …naaaw…surely not…
it must just be that “spin” thing… repeat that one enough and we all just might start to believe it… that’s it…
i liked this one also:
You have, deliberately and for political benefit for your own party, undermined an expeditionary army overseas.
all that in just a month and a half… whodda thunk it…
“we repugs had everything going just fine until the dems took over”…
uh huh…
aphro/valiant is still trying… sorta…
go figure…
February 19th, 2007 at 9:15 pmShe was in a hurry to go the Ferragamo shoe sale in the Green Zone!
February 19th, 2007 at 9:40 pm‘Your Honor and Your Sacrifice’ Is ‘Appreciated’ By Iraq War Critics
I guess that “Mushroom Cloud” and “Birth pangs of the Middle East” CondoSLEAZA was briefed before she left the US, on what to say. The woman is the most inept, ignorant, and delusional, Secretary of State we have ever had.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:46 pmSection 9, thanks for showing us who REALLY has contempt for the troops.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:32 pmi kinda choked on that one…
Comment by katy #75
…I see Karl Rove is “slumming” this evening…
February 19th, 2007 at 11:19 pmsection9 —
My son is in the marines over in Iraq. He has said that most of the soldiers over there do not feel that it was going good until the Democrats took over. He has been writing me for the last six months telling me that they were in the middle of a civil war. In fact, most soldiers are wondering just what the hell we are doing over there.
The Republicans have shot themselves in the foot on this one and I am a former Republican (Libertarian now). Many of my Republican friends do not like what Bush and the neocons have done to our country. We are going to take our Party back and people like you will NOT we welcome in the old/new Republican party.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:51 pmhttp://www.eff.org/
EFF: Legal Guide for Bloggers
Updated April 20, 2006
Whether you’re a newly minted blogger or a relative old-timer, you’ve been seeing more and more stories pop up every day about bloggers getting in trouble for what they post.
Like all journalists and publishers, bloggers sometimes publish information that other people don’t want published. You might, for example, publish something that someone considers defamatory, republish an AP news story that’s under copyright, or write a lengthy piece detailing the alleged crimes of a candidate for public office.
The difference between you and the reporter at your local newspaper is that in many cases, you may not have the benefit of training or resources to help you determine whether what you’re doing is legal. And on top of that, sometimes knowing the law doesn’t help – in many cases it was written for traditional journalists, and the courts haven’t yet decided how it applies to bloggers.
But here’s the important part: None of this should stop you from blogging. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Internet bullies shouldn’t use the law to stifle legitimate free expression. That’s why EFF created this guide, compiling a number of FAQs designed to help you understand your rights and, if necessary, defend your freedom.
To be clear, this guide isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. Only an attorney who knows the details of your particular situation can provide the kind of advice you need if you’re being threatened with a lawsuit. The goal here is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.
Please note that this guide applies to people living in the US. We don’t have the expertise or resources to speak to other countries’ legal traditions, but we’d like to work with those who do. If you know of a similar guide for your own jurisdiction or feel inspired to research and write one, please let us know. We can link to it here.
Table of Contents
or, see an index of all the questions » http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/questions.php
Blogger Legal Liability Issues
The Overview of Legal Liability Issues FAQ briefly addresses some common legal issues that affect you as a publisher, especially situations where you may face legal claims or threats based on the information you published on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Intellectual Property addresses issues that arise when you publish material created by others on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Online Defamation Law provides an overview of defamation (libel) law, including a discussion of the constitutional and statutory privileges that may protect you.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Section 230 Protections discusses a powerful federal law that gives you, as a web host, protection against legal claims arising from hosting information written by third parties.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Privacy addresses the legal issues surrounding the privacy rights of people you blog about.
Bloggers As Journalists
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Reporter’s Privilege is useful to bloggers who report news gathered from confidential sources.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Media Access can help bloggers who need to get access to public records and government meetings, as well as secure press passes to help with newsgathering.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Freedom of Information Act can help bloggers use open government laws to get information from the government.
Other Legal Issues for Bloggers
The Student Bloggers’ Legal FAQ addresses legal issues arising from student blogging. It focuses on blogging by high school (and middle school) students, but also contains information for college students.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Election Law addresses the legal issues you may face blogging about political campaigns.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Labor Law addresses legal issues with workplace blogging, including union organizing, protections for political blogging away from the workplace, and whistle blowing.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Adult Material addresses the legal issues arising from publishing risque adult-oriented content, including obscenity law, community standards on the Internet, and the new 2257 regulations.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:28 amReminds me of the discourse of Marco Antonio, speaking about the “nice citizen” that is Bruto, in the eulogy of Caesar, in the movie of the fifties “Julius Caesar”, with Marlon Brando as Marc Antony, based in the book of Shakespeare.
Marc Antony speaks about how Caesar was a bad man, and Bruto a good one, but managing to pass the message to the contrary.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:33 amUnusually sensible remarks from Secretary Rice. She had this right and was wise to include these comments in her talks with soldiers in Iraq. Would that her boss and other Republicans give this message to our troops.
Homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com
February 20th, 2007 at 8:36 amTeen Girls Teen Titans Hentai Teen Girls That Are Hot
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 8:58 amAll about Digimon Adventure Online Game. Digimon Adventure Fans Blog….
…Digimon is a small virtual pet. You can download and play an online RPG in the Digimon universe. It looks and feels like 2D graphic RPG adventure. You can train and level up your Digimon, make hundreds of quests, and travel through a huge universe a…
March 8th, 2009 at 12:38 pmShag Hairstyles and Haircuts…
shag hairstyle basically gotits name from the word “shaggy” since …once the hair is cutand layered it gives off a shaggy look. The shag hairstyle has always been apopular hairstyle, and there are plenty ofshag hairstyles to choose from…
April 9th, 2009 at 3:07 am